Should the transformation process (from CK to Superman) remain traditional?

Here are my thoughts. In the original Donner and Lester films, Superman was portrayed as being nigh-omnipotent. He could reverse time, invoke memory loss in others, create holographic images of himself by sheer force of will, etc.

So when Clark Kent entered a telephone booth and revealed that he was somehow wearing the Superman costume underneath, it didn't bother me much. After all, this was a character who could basically do anything he wanted.

With Snyder's Man of Steel, though, I'm hoping for something a little different. In my opinion, Superman's powers should not extend beyond what has already been established in the comics over the years: Flight, super-strength, x-ray and heat vision, super-hearing, etc.

Having said that, does it make sense that Clark would wear the Superman suit under his regular attire? Where would he hide the cape and boots? I can see him wearing part of the costume, but it may be more practical for him to keep the boots and cape in a briefcase or something to that effect.

I wouldn't even be against some kind of Kryptonain tech that meant he wore little of it underneath and then it spawned out somehow. As long as it's done tastefully and not like Guyver or power rangers lol

__________________
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards.

I like the briefcase idea.
He doesn't necessarily have to keep it with him either if he hides it well enough, like under something that nobody could lift or move.

Yeah, it's somewhat of a head-scratcher because, in my opinion, the phone booth scene is simply too iconic to remove from the equation. Everyone waits for that pivotal moment when Clark reveals the shield/family crest under his shirt prior to changing into Superman.

Well he could always use a phone booth, there's no issue there.
Although if you think about it, Snyder said it's being treated as if there's been no Superman film ever, so the shirt rip would almost certainly have presence.

__________________
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards.

It's unrealistic, but it's not that important. I care more about seeing a cool shirt rip than questioning how the suit fits under his clothes. Leave questioning every little detail to the Batman movies.

And, if you really need an explanation, lets just say that the suit has nano-tech like someone else suggested, so the things that normally wouldn't fit under clothes aren't there until he needs them. The cape materializes after his shirt and jacket comes off and his boots materialize once he kicks off his loafers.

And, if you really need an explanation, lets just say that the suit has nano-tech like someone else suggested, so the things that normally wouldn't fit under clothes aren't there until he needs them. The cape materializes after his shirt and jacket comes off and his boots materialize once he kicks off his loafers.

I like that! Has nano-tech ever been explored in a Superman film before?

Leave the costume under his clothes, no need to change every little aspect about the character. Besides Superman needs to continue his classic shirt rip as opposed to letting that little copy cat Spiderman steal it.

I once had the thought that if he wrapped the cape around his torso under his clothes it would maybe make him look unfit (not fat exactly but just un-Supermanly).
But with the cape Snyder picked he'd look like a fat mess.

__________________
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards.

Leave the costume under his clothes, no need to change every little aspect about the character. Besides Superman needs to continue his classic shirt rip as opposed to letting that little copy cat Spiderman steal it.

Right on.

I recall someone who used to post here, Superboy I think, who said he wore a Superman costume under his clothes to school, including the cape and no one noticed. So there is a level of plausibility. Maybe you can even say that since it's alien fabric, it's somehow easier to slip under his work suit.

Even if there isn't, it's not a big deal. It's one the of top things that Superman does.

A bigger question is...should he do the Dean Cain spin?

__________________Everyone brings joy to this forum. Some by coming in. Some by going out...

First of all things, the suit under the clothes in Donner movies was something really ambiguous. Sure, he did the shirtt open thing, but then a magic transformation would begin. Like when Clark jumps out the window in STM or when he run through the alley in SII. God, even when he was de-powered he simply lost his suit.

There is no way Calrk could hide THAT cape under his shirt. And well, boots under the shoes and all that is just ridiculous.

I'll stick to the Kryptonian technology that makes the suit "appear" starting with the S symbol as he opens his shirt so the tradition can continue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Sage

I recall someone who used to post here, Superboy I think, who said he wore a Superman costume under his clothes to school, including the cape and no one noticed. So there is a level of plausibility.

I recall someone who used to post here, Superboy I think, who said he wore a Superman costume under his clothes to school, including the cape and no one noticed. So there is a level of plausibility. Maybe you can even say that since it's alien fabric, it's somehow easier to slip under his work suit.

Even if there isn't, it's not a big deal. It's one the of top things that Superman does.

Here are my thoughts. In the original Donner and Lester films, Superman was portrayed as being nigh-omnipotent. He could reverse time, invoke memory loss in others, create holographic images of himself by sheer force of will, etc.

So when Clark Kent entered a telephone booth and revealed that he was somehow wearing the Superman costume underneath, it didn't bother me much. After all, this was a character who could basically do anything he wanted.

With Snyder's Man of Steel, though, I'm hoping for something a little different. In my opinion, Superman's powers should not extend beyond what has already been established in the comics over the years: Flight, super-strength, x-ray and heat vision, super-hearing, etc.

Having said that, does it make sense that Clark would wear the Superman suit under his regular attire? Where would he hide the cape and boots? I can see him wearing part of the costume, but it may be more practical for him to keep the boots and cape in a briefcase or something to that effect.

There is no version of Superman that could have realistically hidden the booths and cape underneath his clothing.
All we need to see is a shirt rip.
For the rest, we just apply what is called the suspension of disbelief and enjoy the scene.
I really enjoyed the transformation processes in the Reeve movies, particularly those in Superman: The Movie.
The CK/Superman transformation process is iconic in and of itself, and I'm sure Snyder has whipped up at least a couple of these scenes which would be on or above the level of those we've seen in the past.
I don't think we'll find an answer to where he keeps his boots and cape (in the movies) and we haven't needed to know before to the films.

There is no version of Superman that could have realistically hidden the booths and cape underneath his clothing.
All we need to see is a shirt rip.
For the rest, we just apply what is called the suspension of disbelief and enjoy the scene.
I really enjoyed the transformation processes in the Reeve movies, particularly those in Superman: The Movie.
The CK/Superman transformation process is iconic in and of itself, and I'm sure Snyder has whipped up at least a couple of these scenes which would be on or above the level of those we've seen in the past.
I don't think we'll find an answer to where he keeps his boots and cape (in the movies) and we haven't needed to know before to the films.

Agreed! We should just suspend our disbelief for the "How come his suit doesn't show underneath his normal clothes" question. I mean, it is what it is and let's just move on. I don't really need it explained, nor do I really care. He is freaking Superman, for goodness sake! Do we REALLY need to have that aspect of Superman explained to us?